I read an article today and tweaked it (only very slightly) in order to more fit my current thoughts. This is coming from a person who has lived here for 10 years and is the father of an Argentinian child. I should state that I enjoy living here albeit my employment is not connected in any way with Argentina.
Can you guys, especially EdRooney (of whose post I often find well thought out and well written - along with many others on this forum) please sound off on it. I'm interested in your views. Especially the paragraph that deals with poverty. I mean it; the post is not meant to be rethorical. I truly want to see where I am with some of my current views.
---
Endemic corruption pervades a few of the Latin America's populist governments. It is widespread in the judiciary, police, and among politicians.
When things inevitably go wrong, these governments try to divert the people's attention from their economic plight by blaming everyone else for the problems, especially foreigners. Start with the IMF, America, and then move on to all "neoliberals." Last, but not least, they proclaim that any opposition is merely a coup trying to overthrow them - usually with the help of foreigners who are trying to get their hands on the country's natural resources.
This underscores another problem: the reluctance to admit that the problems are largely self-inflicted. No one made these electorates vote for populist leaders and to engage in wide-spread corruption. Populist governments require two parties: those who use public office to offer favors in return for votes, and those who accept the patronage and then vote accordingly. That means millions of ordinary people are complicit in practices that have poisoned these country’s economies.
Rectifying this is more easily said than done. Institutional transformation is hard. It calls for patience - often a lot of patience as these types of changes can take many years. It also entails acknowledgment that poverty stems less from the lack of wealth redistribution and is far more due to the lack of stable economic growth and absence of the rule of law - both of which inevitably follow years of pervasive corruption.
---
One more thing... do you feel these people (the president, Moreno, etc.) will receive their comeuppance one day or will they slowly/quickly fade into history with their spoils and be replaced with new faces?
Having written the above question... I guess I can look back to my own native country and find the answer. If politicians were actually held accountable for their unlawful/highly questionable deeds - George W. Bush and Dick Chaney would, at least, be hauled before a court of justice. Let's add to that list a lot the individuals who could be shown to have a direct connection the the 2008 financial crisis. However, having said that, I recall a passage from above: "No one made these electorates vote for populist leaders and to engage in wide-spread corruption." Many of the people "duped" into the financial crisis were to blame as well. But for the greed of the people, it would have been hard for those at the top to "dupe" them into biting off more than they could chew.
OK.... please sound off.
Can you guys, especially EdRooney (of whose post I often find well thought out and well written - along with many others on this forum) please sound off on it. I'm interested in your views. Especially the paragraph that deals with poverty. I mean it; the post is not meant to be rethorical. I truly want to see where I am with some of my current views.
---
Endemic corruption pervades a few of the Latin America's populist governments. It is widespread in the judiciary, police, and among politicians.
When things inevitably go wrong, these governments try to divert the people's attention from their economic plight by blaming everyone else for the problems, especially foreigners. Start with the IMF, America, and then move on to all "neoliberals." Last, but not least, they proclaim that any opposition is merely a coup trying to overthrow them - usually with the help of foreigners who are trying to get their hands on the country's natural resources.
This underscores another problem: the reluctance to admit that the problems are largely self-inflicted. No one made these electorates vote for populist leaders and to engage in wide-spread corruption. Populist governments require two parties: those who use public office to offer favors in return for votes, and those who accept the patronage and then vote accordingly. That means millions of ordinary people are complicit in practices that have poisoned these country’s economies.
Rectifying this is more easily said than done. Institutional transformation is hard. It calls for patience - often a lot of patience as these types of changes can take many years. It also entails acknowledgment that poverty stems less from the lack of wealth redistribution and is far more due to the lack of stable economic growth and absence of the rule of law - both of which inevitably follow years of pervasive corruption.
---
One more thing... do you feel these people (the president, Moreno, etc.) will receive their comeuppance one day or will they slowly/quickly fade into history with their spoils and be replaced with new faces?
Having written the above question... I guess I can look back to my own native country and find the answer. If politicians were actually held accountable for their unlawful/highly questionable deeds - George W. Bush and Dick Chaney would, at least, be hauled before a court of justice. Let's add to that list a lot the individuals who could be shown to have a direct connection the the 2008 financial crisis. However, having said that, I recall a passage from above: "No one made these electorates vote for populist leaders and to engage in wide-spread corruption." Many of the people "duped" into the financial crisis were to blame as well. But for the greed of the people, it would have been hard for those at the top to "dupe" them into biting off more than they could chew.
OK.... please sound off.
